Evolution Explainer

Explaining Evolution. An animation in collaboration with Adam Quirk of Wreck and Salvage

Share Button


Posted to Topical
Tags: ,
November 21, 2008 • 7:00 pm | Permalink


  • planexzeropoint says:

    yes the genetic make up remains the same whats your point?

  • SonomaDave1 says:

    I recently saw someone wearing jeans with no booty in them, AND no undergarments. Will they become whalelike too? Or will their faded jeans just get ratty like mine and die a Goodwill-type death?

  • SuperFinGuy says:

    planexzeropoint if you think that random mutation is just a bad hypothesis for evolution ok but an actual scientific theory is an explanation of the facts.

  • planexzeropoint says:

    there you all have my email now. hope this clears up my position.

  • Rybot9000 says:

    I didn't say anything of the sort.

  • Zarbod says:

    Dave, if their jeans are ratty their genes won't be going no where.

  • bollkg2008 says:

    if you like alien movies just watch the prophecy trailer. you`ll find it when you type in prophecy teaser 2. movie will come to theaters 2010.

  • SonomaDave1 says:

    So instead of "the road to nowhwere" they have the genes to nowhere! I think I am beginning to gets it.

  • excelgeo says:

    this was the rocketboom episode that got me interested in the channel

  • WiiLuxio says:


  • Zarbod says:

    Well I know my genes are going nowhere.

  • b-man says:

    " hit by lightening or salt and suddenly mutated into a moving thing?"

    The validity of Darwin's theory of evolution rests on the second largest conundrum

    in human history. That is, how did the single cell organism come into existence. Poo-pooing this fact away

    with "...just try not to worry about it..." seems quite arrogant. Shall we deny the basic tenets of science?

    Even today's top Darwinists and Evolutionists cannot answer this question even though they have found

    kleenex boxes that are over 500 million years old containing petrified whale snot.

    • chrismenning says:

      Actually, there's a whole field of science dedicated to that conundrum called Abiogenesis. I've already got a script in the can on that subject. And now...we wait.

      • b-man says:

        There may be a whole field of science dedicated to finding the answer, however my point was that nobody really knows. Abiogenesis is a cool name though. I'm sure the Intelligent Design people love using it.

        BTW, there's also a whole field of science dedicated to researching Mentos & Coke. Hey, maybe there's the smoking gun....?

        • Rick says:

          Going into great detail about it or not, this theory still remains a better explanation than its main alternative... God. According to Darwin, although a situation may seem improbable, there is always a chance because of time and/or natural selection. In the case that God made something appear out of nothing, the question still remains well then what made God? There is no explanation or chance yet put forward to answer that... here, Darwin does put something forward and allows time to do the rest.

          • b-man says:

            No one is disagreeing with Darwin or evolution. The question posed was "where did the first organic single cell organism" come from? Amazing how so many are afraid to say " I don't know."

          • Rick says:

            i dont know

          • b-man says:

            Hey Rick, here are a few interesting podcasts on the topic:


            For the following (Secular humanist opinion) you will need to find the show on their player which opens up




  • C-C says:

    Joanne said "... originally it was just a fluke ..." and that was funny because a fluke is one of the lobes of a whale's tail.

    I'm always up for a good party but why are we celebrating Chuckie D's b-day 4 months early and with an 9 month old episode?

  • Tanru2000 says:

    A lot of people find evolution a difficult concept to grasp... it happens on such a huge time-scale that it's easier to accept 'intelligent design' rather than subtle mutations and selection pressure over millions of years. I think it's hard to picture a group of 12 things in your mind let alone, 100 or 1000 or 1000000!

  • halabalo195 says:


  • GaretTheAssassin says:

    planexzeropoint- You, sir, are a fool. I may be a fool as well, but at least I'm not as closed minded.

    Just because goats never flew, doesn't mean other lifeforms didn't evolve to suit the environment. Your logic is arbitrary, not to mention annoying.

  • jsfitzgerrel says:

    making our main goal to reproduce is suicide.

  • jsfitzgerrel says:

    so are cigs but gotta have em

  • realgiantbison says:

    I like rocketboom!

  • donrane says:

    Its not really a huge time-scale if you think about it.. Look what humans have done to dogs just over a few human generations.. We have formed them to our needs as we have with many other animals like cows and pigions..and thats has been done in a very short timespan.

  • killwhiteyvoteoboma says:

    I really like the whole Monty Python aspect of the visuals - goes gr8 W/her UK vibe! More like this pls! =]

  • Tanru2000 says:

    True - but those are still the one species. Think about how long and how many mutations require a wing or... lungs. Boggles the mind.

  • hjeremy2222 says:

    This was the first rocketboom I saw

  • contents99 says:

    There's always going to a missing link. Every time a intermediate fossil is found, there are two more missing links either side and so on.

  • zephyrmaster00Z says:

    Bull. Shit.

  • ELuhn says:

    Well. Reasoned.

  • ELuhn says:

    It's a clone.

  • ELuhn says:

    No, I knew a girl in high school whose jeans were practically falling off the bone. I'm *sure* she's been knocked up by now.

  • Rybot9000 says:

    Yea... it comes from a long history of epistemic inquiry. From Pyrrhonism to Academic Scepticism. A "theory" broadly speaking is an attempt to explain the facts. Absolute Certainty is a fallacy so a theory is not "Absolute Truth". In Science a theory is an explanation which fits the facts, has been peer-reviewed and accepted as an adequate account. Much different than colloquial usage.

  • Howie47 says:

    Darwin tried cutting the tails off of dogs. He found it was never passed on. Genetic (deformities) are rarely passed on. Never seen a species of two headed snakes. Although some of them live to adult and mate.
    Yep, you got to be pretty desperate to believe that fairy tale.
    Devolution is what is happening; and we got a whole world of idiots that proves it.
    Happy Birthday Darwin. Hope you don't regret that day. Peace

  • TechsysPete says:

    Is she making fun of it?

  • TechsysPete says:

    Is she making fun of it?

  • TechsysPete says:

    Is she making fun of it?

  • MyStrangeNewMexico says:

    I like that Rocketboom wanted to make something in defense of evolution, but this is not a very good video. It downplays the amount of time most mutations take, downplays the incremental way those mutations are made, confuses evolution and abiogenesis, and chooses inaccurate and kind of ridiculous examples to make its point. Try it again, maybe.

  • MyStrangeNewMexico says:

    I like that Rocketboom wanted to make something in defense of evolution, but this is not a very good video. It downplays the amount of time most mutations take, downplays the incremental way those mutations are made, confuses evolution and abiogenesis, and chooses inaccurate and kind of ridiculous examples to make its point. Try it again, maybe.

  • MyStrangeNewMexico says:

    I like that Rocketboom wanted to make something in defense of evolution, but this is not a very good video. It downplays the amount of time most mutations take, downplays the incremental way those mutations are made, confuses evolution and abiogenesis, and chooses inaccurate and kind of ridiculous examples to make its point. Try it again, maybe.

  • C-C says:

    How come Joanne didn't get to go play in CO with the rest of you?

    Elie for "Burger Queen"!

    Yatta, the windshield looks clean to me!

    • Ellie says:

      It was such a fun trip!!! :) We worked the entire time, oh, and yes, I did eat some burgers, too. I love getting fast food when I'm away from the city. I can eat like a 500lb man. NOMNOM!!

      And Yatta did a good job with the winshield, but ya know... I have to tease ;)

  • darkangel2327 says:

    last point was the really good.

  • Kam says:

  • Lica says:

    Did anybody notice that the date she says is February 12th 2008?

  • Newton says:

    Here's a website that actually explains the concept of evolution and natural selection fairly well if you have the time to watch some of these lengthy videos. They talk about quite a few different scientific topics but the spend a bit of time on the whole Darwin thing.

    It isn't quite a flashy as the chainsaw removing whale legs but they do have some really cool visuals.

  • Firster says:

    Frankly, it's quite beyond me how a thinking person could understand even a fraction of the unfathomable complexity of the human body and think that it developed in all of its delicate intricacy without some intelligent creative influence. The only conclusion I can draw is that there is a God, and He did it. So the question is who or what is this God and has He claimed any credit for His creation? In fact, He has, and his name is Jesus Christ.

    • Newton says:

      This is the same logic that used to be used for chemistry, physics, and other fields.

      "I can't understand it so it must be too hard to understand so therefore some supernatural being must be present".

      Don't get me wrong, there is quite a bit that scientist don't understand and I'm not saying that there isn't a God (or Jesus) but to simply throw up your hands when things get too complex is an (educationally) defeatist attitude.

  • Paris Hilton says:

    I'm having a whale of a time. Party on Gene Poole.

  • leron says:

    Well, Jesus Christ.

    (Hey, I wasn't the one who brought the guy up.)

    All I can tell you is, when I was a kid the weirdest adults, and the ones who treated me the worst, were the ones who dressed in funny black outfits and claimed to be doing the work of Jesus. One time as a 4th grader I was knocked to the ground and kicked multiple times by a nun, for the crime of touching a fire extinguisher with a single finger while on line in the hall. I remember lying there on the tiled hallway floor thinking, Jesus would never do this.

    I did develop the basic fist-fighting skills needed to co-exist with Cathilic boys at the time. I guess I'm grateful for that.

    But like many folks (including our new president), I come from a mix of backgrounds. Some of my relatives think Jesus is da bomb, while others from the other side of the tree think he was just a meshuggah kid who thought too much of himself. I decided long ago not to take sides in this fairy tale war.

    I feel closest to God sitting halfway up a mountain side at sunset, wearing good boots and holding a canteen of clean water and seeing no sign of human encroachment to the horizon, and knowing it's a reasonable hike back to a campsite where a warm first and half a warmer sleeping bag will be weaiting for me. You can keep your big buildings and candles and incense.

    I hate creationism. Creationists try to use the complexity of biological life, and some people's lack of knowledge and understand of that complexity, to justify their religious agenda. They pump out a lot of crap and call it science when in fact it is not, it has no predictive value whatsoever. Some of this crap is purveyed by people who know better, and who believe they are doing God's work through deception. Uh, right.

    It's sort of the same thing McCain and Palin were trying to do with the economy. Hey, trust us. (snort)

    I have never understood the preoccupation with figuring out how life started. Sure, for some it makes a nice career, but the rest of us? Just be glad you got a slice of what the Jews call "the astonishment of sentience." There are better ways to spend all that time creationists spend trying to prove the unprovable, like perfecting your margarita recipe (Paris, looking at you here....).

  • b-man says:

    The comment section seeems to have er... mutated. There goes the neighborhood.

  • leron says:

    sorry, i meant "never look down."

  • mike_dixon says:

    Wow hey I just about wore out my scroll wheel here. Cool!

  • b-man says:

    Now is timely or what!!!

    Here's a chance for all you creationists to make 100,000 Turkish lira
    which is roughly around $60,000 US give or take a few pesos.

    Man if I weren't so busy posting comments on RB, I'd take a crack at it.
    I could use the 60 grand.

  • Abdullah says:

    The fact that I don't believe in evolution proves that it's not true because evolution should not allow me to believe in something that is antithetical to itself. Haha. On a serious note, what you call defects I like to call signs of God's magnanimity.

    I guess we'll just have to wait for the Day of Judgment to see who was right since both sides claim their theory to be provable but not falsifiable.

  • Martintfre says:

    Lamarck was thinking that physiological changes would be passed on. Genetics was not yet understood so they were making the best guess they could with the tools they had.

  • baxizach says:

    i think she meant to dumb it down for the retarded fuckwit creationists inbread morons that believe in magic and all that

  • jeffmagic32 says:

    it comes down to probabilities, not certainties. I have type 1 diabetes. My kids are more likely than yours to also have it. If the mom also has diabetes, our kids are even more likely to have it.

  • davidheromany says:


  • davidheromany says:


  • davidheromany says:


  • DuralastTurbo says:

    Look down, clown =)

  • mergatroidal says:

    Can something that exists originate from absolute nothing? The simple and logical conclusion to the question can be simply wiped from the mind like the wet booger on the tip of your finger, though.

  • netiaz says:

    It's better than Bible stories.

  • netiaz says:

    This video explains how Old Greg came about.

  • aerobique says:

    brothers and sisters- yeaH!

    OUR NATURE ON EARTH -no matter where it comes from-(since today i call it:UNAE)
    ->is our all god.

    Your gods know it.

    And they cry all day.

  • cariosus says:

    "Genetic (deformities) are rarely passed on" Deny the big bang, abiogenesis, evolution, etc. all you want. But to say "deformities" are "rarely passed on" (and back it up with 'no 2 headed snakes') boggles my mind. Please read a Biology book. Please.

    ...You do realize that two headed snakes are in fact two snakes, no? Tell me that was a joke.

  • Howie47 says:

    DNA has a mechanism that prevents most point mutations from being passed on. Natural selection, 'weeds out', harmful mutations over time. To be abopted, mutations must be instantly beneficial to survival.
    That isn't observed. Isn't tangible. But is the only hope of DEAD Neo-Darwinism.
    Which is the only hope of the God, ignorant

  • cariosus says:

    If you believe this, you've simply misunderstood the nature of DNA, evolution, natural selection, mutations and Neo-Darwinism.
    ps. sickle cell anemia

  • Howie47 says:

    Sickle cell proves my rule also. It is naturally deselected from populations removed from epidemic malaria locations.
    In these single point diseases, modern medicine has interrupted natural selection. By
    allowing longer life of the victims, and encouraging their continued reproduction.
    However we don't see these single point mutations accumulating into new morphological
    characteristics. (super humans)
    Doesn't happen, the idea is a lame fairy tale.

  • Laspher says:

    Pfft Bible stories OWNS.

  • GoodScienceForYou says:

    The theroy of evolution is a complete false premise that any creatures have ever evolved in the natural world in to other species or from other genus. It is the most ridiculous mass hysteria on the planet. How stupid is it to follow a belief and call it "science"?

  • dtlegend72 says:

    this video is rediculous mutations r never helpful and always hurtful or nuetral and neo-darwinism wasnt even darwins theory it was devries

  • DanBen514 says:

    mutations are not always hurtful at all..

  • Jeremyguru says:

    "...mutations r never helpful..." That is not true. You are ignorant. Please go get a basic science education at a proper university...and I don't mean bible "school."

  • Jeremyguru says:

    The only problem with evolutionary theory is that you clearly don't understand it. Go get an education.

  • 45a66 says:

    was that about the dinosaw?
    No, think it was somrones birthday, well, anyway give the radiation back to nature, I would like to see this gripdinosawhawk after this stoneage.
    good hunting.

  • dtlegend72 says:

    why do you call me ignorant do you even have any proof to back up what u r sayin
    Ohh and by technical terms, evolution is not science IT IS THEORY

  • dtlegend72 says:

    i didnt say they were always harmful
    i said they ethier hurt u or dont effect u
    but there has never been a mutation that helped u

  • dtlegend72 says:

    hmm u know i thought evolution was supposed to be random
    and yet the very words "natural selection" means nature chooses

  • Jeremyguru says:

    Again, you show your complete ignorance of basic science. Yes, evolution is a "theory" just like atomic theory, gravitational theory and germ theory. Do you not believe in atoms, gravity or germs?

    You need to go to school and learn what a SCIENTIFIC THEORY means.

  • cariosus says:

    It's a misconception... MUTATION is random. Having a gene that makes animals faster won't mutate/exist sooner because it's useful, but if/when it DOES mutate, nature "chooses" it because that gene has an obvious advantage over "slow" genes. So that gene lives on in fast animals that reproduce because they have a higher fitness than slow ones. ("Fitness" in Biology)

  • dtlegend72 says:

    u still havent answered my question
    what is your proof

  • dtlegend72 says:

    you still said nature chooses
    youve just given it a mind

  • dtlegend72 says:

    im also talkin about the definition of true science
    that it must be repeatable,recordable, and tanjable

  • Jeremyguru says:

    Proof? It's been proven to the point of over-kill. Go study science. You'll find all the evidence you'll ever need.

    It's not my job to teach you science. It's YOUR responsibility to get an education. You've already demonstrated the you don't even understand basic science terms. Go learn.

  • XCHAPYEG says:

    I believe in both God and the evolution theory. Intellegent Design, anyone?

  • SuperFinGuy says:

    "MUTATION is random"

    No it is not. Mutation is induced. It is called mutagenesis. This has been proven in the lad, while random mutation is just an after the fact rationalization.

  • cariosus says:

    "Factors in the environment are thought to influence the rate of mutation but are not generally thought to influence the direction of mutation. For example, exposure to harmful chemicals may increase the mutation rate, but will not cause more mutations that make the organism resistant to those chemicals. In this respect, mutations are random—whether a particular mutation happens or not is generally unrelated to how useful that mutation would be."

  • cariosus says:


  • Leave a comment:

    Your email address will not be published.

    Stay informed. Sign-Up to be notified of news and new releases.

    video archives | about | chat | youtube